Author: Carmen Chan

There are approximately 5000 – 10,000 different languages in the world (Wikipedia, 2009). According to statistics from 2001 Census of Canada, the population of visible minorities living in Canada is approximately 29,639,030 out of Canada’s total population of 3,983,845 of that 1,029,395 are Chinese, 917,075 are South Africans and 198,880 are Southeast Asians(Statistics Canada, 2001). Although many are aware that Canada is a multilingual and multicultural nation, most are ignorant about the results such differences can have on society. Today’s classrooms especially in metropolitan cities consist of students of various backgrounds; however, the current traditional approaches to teaching and learning cater mostly to students’ whose mother tongue is English. The melting pot is boiling over. The current literacy education structure needs to be re-designed and re-organized in order to better prepare students for the multiliteral and diverse environments.

In the article “A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies: Designing Social Futures” the New London Group views that considering the multiliteracies of diverse students with various cultural backgrounds is important to teaching and learning multiliteracies for they believe “effective citizenship and productive work now require that we interact effectively using multiple languages, multiple Englishes, and communication patterns that more frequently cross cultural, community, and national boundaries” (The New London Group, 1996). Queensland’s Department of Education and Training is also advocating multiliteracies and communication media through diversity. They believe “the ability to operate in the middle world between cultures can be generated in very young learners of another language. While the experience of the so-called third place may occur through the learning of one language, it is a skill that can be transferred to dealings with other cultures in other contexts. Knowledge of the intent and tone of the language allows a true understanding of the messages in intercultural communication” (Queensland, 2004). To make intercultural communication possible the traditional four wall classroom needs to be reorganized and thought of as a borderless learning and teaching community where students can venture off to classrooms of different cultures and experiment with multiliteracies. This can be made possible with the use of various communication technologies and the analysis of various cultural texts. This valuable experience will help to equip isolated students with skills to attack real world challenges.

New London Group argues that the current literacy education system is inadequate and cannot effectively prepare students for full participation in their working, community and personal lives. We exist in an information age where information is vital to success and even survival. Even though information is more accessible than before, information is hiding behind different faces or representations. The New London Group urges that schools’ literacy curriculum be mindful to include multiliteracies closely associated with communication technology of the 21st century. According to Queensland’s Department of Education and training“multiliteracies and communications media refers to technologies of communication that use various codes for the exchange of messages, texts and information. Historically, communications media have included spoken language, writing, print and some visual media like photograph and film. Since World War II, the various electronic media such as television and other digital information technologies have provided much more complex audiovisual layers to these” (Queensland, 2004). Communication technologies alter the way people interact with information and culture. Keeping up with new communication technologies used in our information age is vital because they “change the way we use old media, enhancing and augmenting them” (Queensland, 2004) To become multiliterate “What is also required is the mastery of traditional skills and techniques, genres and texts, and their applications through new media and new technologies” (Queensland, 2004).

Multiliteracy is more than knowing how communication technologies affect information, it also includes how various texts are used together to construct meaning. Text today is blend of traditional print, visual arts and audio text. These texts do not exist in solitude. Their relationship on a page creates the overall meaning that the creator is attempting to establish. For instance, the graphs and charts that accompany a newspaper article are vital to the readers’ general understanding of the subject. The inability to read or interpret charts is the same as the inability to understand the visual images used along with written text. Decoding information from various representations to which it can be understood and analyzed requires one to have prior experience with such texts. Therefore, teaching information literacy is important in schools for such skills and capabilities will enable students to “locate, evaluate and use effectively the needed information” (Dobson & Willinksky, 2009). To do this, The New London Group emphasizes on the concept of design “as curriculum is a design for social futures, we need to introduce the notion of pedagogy as Design” as design is “the idea of Design is one that recognizes the different Available Designs of meaning, located as they are in different cultural context” because it is “through their co-engagement in Designing, people transform their relations with each other, and so transform themselves” (The New London Group, 1996). The result of the meaningful transformatin is the creation of new meanings and identities where individuals are “creator of their social futures” ( The New London Group, 1996).

The job of today’s educators is challenging because they are having to constantly learn new practices and revise learned approaches to effectively prepare young learners for the rapidly changing world. However, once learners have master the fundamentals of multiliteracies they will be able to explore and learn independently.

References:
Dobson T, Willinsky J. Digital Literacy. In: Olson D, Torrance N, editors. Cambridge Handbook on Literacy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2009. Retrieved the November 24, 2009 from: http://pkp.sfu.ca/files/Digital%20Literacy.pdf

Multiliteracies and Communications Media. Queensland Government: Department of Education and Training. Retrieved on November 25, 2009 from http://education.qld.gov.au/corporate/newbasics/html/curric-org/comm.html.

New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 60-92. Retrieved, November 25, 2009, from http://newlearningonline.com/~newlearn/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/multiliteracies_her_vol_66_1996.pdf

Wikipedia. Retrieved on November 25, 2009. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_languages
Statistics Canada. Retrieved on November 24, 2009. Retrieved from http://www12.statcan.ca/english/profil01/CP01/Details/Page.cfm?Lang=E&Geo1=PR&Code1=01&Geo2=PR&Code2=01&Data=Count&SearchText=Canada&SearchType=Begins&SearchPR=01&B1=All&Custom=.

The current electronic literary structure and system is widely used. Because of its ease in accessibility and transferability, students, researchers and scholars rely heavily on e-documents for research. However, the present day system is limiting especially for knowledge workers. In the article “Xanalogical structure, needed now more than ever: Parallel documents, deep links to content, deep versioning and deep re-use” Theodore Nelson offers the Xanadu Project as an alternative that would maximize the advantages and minimize the disadvantages of the electronic document system.

Nelson describes the Xanadu Project as “an alternative paradigm for a computer universe, with its own alternative history of the computer field and alternative ideas of media, computer life and the nature of connections” (Nelson, 1999) and it is the original hypertext project; [however] it is often misunderstood as an attempt to create the World Wide Web” (Nelson, 1999). The Xanadu Model is more advanced than the world wide web in fact the world wide web was what Nelson was trying to prevent (Nelson, 1999).

In comparison to Nelson’s ambitious xanalogical model, the current electronic literary system operates on many flaws and implications that prevent users from making full use of the global internet system. Today’s e-document is simply an electronic version of the original document and nothing more. Even though the document is viewed online it does not offer any additional features that would enable further reading and understanding of the subject. As a result, the level of connectivity is low. As Paul Delany notes in “Hypermedia and literary studies” the “first essential capability of a good electronic document system is to provide a means of promoting the connection of ideas and the communication between individual scholars. The capabilities can be conceived of as a set of tools for creating a hypertext structure or the underlying framework of all electronic document systems developed” (Delany, 1995). In addition to the limitations, the electronic literary system fails to provide adequate information of related materials and resources used. Nelson believes “serious electronic literature (for scholarship, detailed controversy and detailed collaboration) must support bidirectional and profuse links, which cannot be embedded; and must offer facilities for easily tracking re-use on a principled basis among versions and quotations” (Nelson, 1999).

Nelson’s solution to these implications is by creating a parallel universe which begins with a basic interface model of parallel visualization. Parallel visualization is viewing documents side by side simultaneously as a result creating a web of information. This model will enable knowledge workers to have access to original documents and other related resources all at the same time. Furthermore, the origins of quotations will appear along with the electronic document. This is the result of establishing a permanent link between resources. Nelson also proposed a “valid copyright system … for frictionless, non-negotiated quotation at any time and in any amount” (Nelson, 1999). This will encourage more electronic publications for authors will be credited for their work.

Nelson’s xanalogical structure is practical than today’s one way hypertext structure. Critics such as Gary Wolf commented on Nelson’s model in his article entitled “ The Curse of Xanadu” where Wolf said the Xanadu Project “ was the most radical computer dream of the hacker era. Ted Nelson’s Xanadu project was supposed to be the universal, democratic hypertext library that would help human life evolve into an entirely new form” (Wolf, 1995). The Xanadu model would not only raise the standards of text representation but also transform the way of thinking and learning. Despite these advantages the Xanadu project was unsuccessful. Wolf notes that “the fact that Nelson has had only since about 1960 to build his reputation as the king of unsuccessful software development makes Xanadu interesting for another reason: the project’s failure (or, viewed more optimistically, its long-delayed success) coincides almost exactly with the birth of hacker culture. Xanadu’s manic and highly publicized swerves from triumph to bankruptcy show a side of hackerdom that is as important, perhaps, as tales of billion-dollar companies born in garages” (Wolf, 1995).

Nelson’s Xanadu Project struggles to achieve success against the widely used electronic literary system. In the forty years of development, Xanadu is still in its initial planning stage. Despite Nelson’s lack of success, the Xanadu Project received a great deal of attention and it continues to inspire numerous other software programs. The Xanadu model is built with knowledge workers in mind. This model strives to improve the uni-directional system and transform the ways people interact with electronic documents.

References:

Delany, Paul. (1995). “Hypermedia and literary studies.”

Nelson, Theodore. (1999). “Xanalogical structure, needed now more than ever: Parallel documents, deep links to content, deep versioning and deep re-use.” Retrieved November 14, 2009.

Wolf, Gary. (1995). “The Curse of Xanadu” < http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/3.06/xanadu.html> Retrieved November 13, 2009.

The dictionary defines “text” as the original words of something written or printed as opposed to a translation, paraphrase or revision. According to this definition primary documents would constitute as text whereas the translation of a novel into Korean or Swedish would not. In that case, O’Donnell argues text today is highly unstable due to the changes in technology.

Text is endangered due to the way it is digitalized and organized. Rules of writing such as grammar and punctuation did not govern writing systems of the past. Instead “the ancients made do in a wilderness of irregular scratches on a page, and made do quite well.” (O’Donnell, 1998) Writing in the past was less formalized and structured which indicates that the purpose of writing was not for wide distribution but for personal use. This belief created a casual and utilitarian culture for writing.

People today may view such text as chaotic due to the absence of paragraphs and punctuations. But instead of appreciating the distinctiveness of the original text, people today impose their own system of writing by adding punctuations and revising the grammar to make the text fit into the current period. O’Donnell illustrates text found during the 20th century was very stable with appropriate formatting and editing, the attention to appearance was present as well. However, it was during the late 1900’s that “we have now returned to a time of instability marked by debate over means of presentation.” (O’Donnell, 1998) The vast options of representing and storing text are diluting the original work.

O’Donnell illustrates that “[t]o enter a text in a computer means to make choices. It is possible to make the simplest possible set of choices and to allow the text to take the form of a series of Roman alphabet characters, upper and lower case, delimited by carriage returns, tabs, and a handful of standard punctuation marks.” (O’Donnell, 1998) Such choices made by people today assigned to transfer information and ideas of the past will have a significant impact on how newly presented text will be understood. Before virtual libraries replace libraries it is important to consider just how fragile text is. Even the simple process of changing the font of the text can take the life and time out of the text.

Despite the implications associated with the digitalization of text, the concept of the virtual library is a step many libraries especially in the post secondary level are taking and planning towards. O’Donnell describes the “ ‘virtual library’ as a dream that many share” (O’Donnell, 1994) The public’s confidence in virtual libraries can be observed “in 1992, [when] public libraries throughout California suffered major budget cuts up to 65% forcing branches to layoff staff, reduce hours of operation, and eliminate new purchases. In some counties libraries closed down altogether when voters failed to approve taxes that would have supported them. In the same year, according to The Washington Post, the state suspended all construction plans for new university libraries in order to focus its attention and budget on ‘virtual libraries.’” (Roy, 1997) With this much focus and government support, soon print-based libraries will become museums or historical sites where tour guides announce through their loud speakers that people used to read, research and relax in such an institution.

One of the main benefits of virtual libraries is that it does increase access and availability because resources will be made available online anywhere. However, switching from print-based libraries to virtual libraries only replaces previous limitations with new restrictions. O’Donnell explains the problems surrounding accessibility in the representation of text by various word processing formats in that “[a]n abundance of word processing formats has generated another abundance of would-be standard formats. Recognition of these formats depends on users’ choices of hardware and software. If, for example, I need to get tax forms from the U.S. Treasury, I can find them on the World Wide Web and print them at home in minutes. But I must have previously acquired one of (at last count) four different ways to manage text (PDF, PCL, PostScript, or SGML) in order to get those forms at all.” (O’Donnell, 1998) Therefore, users with computers or software that is not compatible or up to date will be denied access. Thus, what seems to be progression is actually regression.

In addition to computer incompatibility, technologies are changing rapidly thus information is constantly being formatted and reformatted into the technology of the time. The transfer of text from one entity to another is a dangerous risk because the process threatens the survival of the original text. Similar to oral cultures as information is passed down from generation to generation details and meanings are altered and in today’s society each generation of technology is replacing the next generation at a much faster rate. Perhaps “our present plans to convert as much as possible of our print heritage to digits might, for the most part, be a waste of money…since, as reading loses favor… in one hundred years almost no one will read the literature–books and journals–from the past because it will be obsolete in the electronic medium. As a consequence.”(Seiler and Surprenant, 1991)

It is important to re-evaluate the process of managing and presenting text. In order to strengthen the quality of electronic resources and virtual libraries relationships between libraries, creators, publishers and aggregators of electronic resources need to be well established to reduce the loss of text in the process.

References:

O’Donnell, J. (1998). Hyperlink: The instability of the text. Avatars of the word: Papyrus to cyberspace, Retrieved September 20, 2009, from http://www.public.asu.edu/~dgilfill/speakers/odonnell1.html

O’Donnell, James J. (1994) “The Virtual Library; An Idea Whose Time Has Passed.” Gateways, Gatekeepers, and Roles in the Information Omniverse: Proceedings of the Third Symposium. Eds. Ann Okerson and Dru Mogge. Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries Office of Scientific and Academic Publishing. 19-32.

Roy, Michael V. (1997) “The Virtual Library: Rhetoric and Reality” © IT Journal On-Line: Spring 1997. Retrieved October 1, 2009, from http://etext.virginia.edu/journals/itjournal/1997/Articles/miker.html.

Seiler, Lauren, and Thomas Surprenant. (1991) “When We Get the Libraries We Want, Will We Want the Libraries We Get?” Wilson Library Bulletin. 29..157.